Since someone didn't take High School Civics (look up the video), I'll remind people that it was the Supreme Court that did this, specifically the far-right Trump-appointed justices. The President doesn't get to decide what Supreme Court decisions he wants or doesn't want. It's now up to Congress to at least try to do something, but it will be almost impossible.
But reactive regulation, written in the wake of public outrage, is rarely good.
I've always thought that laws named after a specific person were pretty much always bad laws. They tend to be knee-jerk reactions to one-off newsworthy events and not reasonable compromises to important problems.
Not long after the NCMEC was founded, I remember them running ads/PSAs about how many children were abducted. The numbers were pretty scary, lots of kids. I'm a math geek so I ran the numbers. If their numbers were right, it meant that by age 18 almost half of all kids had been abducted.
It turns out they counted not true abductions, but custodial disputes including being some very small amount of time late for dropping off a child with the other parent. Actual abductions are horrific, but accounted for a small fraction of their so-called "statistics" at the time. I guess trying to justify their existence?
In addition to Alaska and Connecticut, New Hampshire doesn't really have Sheriffs doing law enforcement. Although they are sworn officers, the role of Sheriff here is basically courtroom security and prisoner transportation. I think they can also do traffic stops? Of course, any position at all can be susceptible to petty abuses, but there's not that much room here for anything major.
The main difference is that snail mail costs $$. $ to print the mail and $ to send it even at bulk rate. Phone calls and email are effectively free, so there is a lot more of those most of the time. Of course, given that it's election season here, my mailbox is crammed with candidate flyers (pretty much all of them for/against one specific candidate.
Have you tried reporting it as "Sensitive media"? Maybe they just swapped the two categories. Maybe we should try all the categories to find out which is now which...
One of the things these vague "perception" polls almost never do is collect partner data on how important the issue is to the subject. 60% of people might be in favor of or against something, but 90% of those people don't really care that much about it or think it's an important issue. And of course, there's still the big difference between "thinking something is bad" and "making that something illegal".
I completely agree that cops WAY too often use these pretextual excuses to finagle their way into full searches of absurdly questionable legality. I hate that they get away with doing this, time after time. But....
Even if marijuana is legal, driving under the influence of marijuana is not. There's at least some similarity to spotting what looks like an open container of alcohol. That should give them the right to conduct a field sobriety test and look for actual evidence of open marijuana in (reasonable places in) the car.
I really can't believe I'm saying this out loud. Especially not as an Anonymous Coward :-)
I also mocked the brand new Juniper Networks raising a ton of money based on vaporware. Turns out they actually did have a product or two on the way…
I'd love to see a pointer to that article, if it's still around. I lived one of the other Juniper articles published here in real life for almost 2 years, so I love to see coverage when I can.
Sadly, there's basically not one fact in this article that wouldn't be completely believable about the United States. We fabricate or plant physical evidence and hide exculpatory stuff all the time, that's just another day at work for many LEOs.
It's not remotely a leap to consider actively planting digital evidence, which can be even harder to refute. And given that the device is in the hands of the police, it would be easy for them to make sure no traces of the tampering remained before defense could get the device examined by an outside forensics expert.
"But the more important question right now is why would Congress be looking to give the Copyright Office more autonomy when it's quite clear that the Office has absolutely no competency when it comes to modernizing its system, and there has been a six-year pattern of throwing away money without a properly managed plan and a longstanding practice of lying about it to Congress itself?"
Sounds like Congress figured out they are perfectly suited to overseeing themselves, saving Congress the trouble of lacking all competency and then lying about it....
but why would an archival storage system for something that can by definition be considered evidence in legal cases allow people to log in and erase or alter that evidence?
Even with an audit trail (which is implied), this just seems like madness. Every frame of footage uploaded should be 100% protected. During any trial that happens, the two sides are of course allowed to pick and choose exactly the frames they want to present to support their case.....
If a worm were spread that permanently bricked every Philips smart light bulb it connected to, the public backlash against Philips would start some "serious" thinking about this stuff. The cost to the "innocent externals" would be a few bucks for a busted lightbulb, the cost to Philips would be a warning shot across their bow.
I see nothing at all on NameCheap's page about how to sign the petition. I see a place to sign up for their mailing list, and a place to share the page. But nothing about signing the petition.
Well, it doesn't really matter much if latency is actually measured in Ms, rather than ms. 1Ms is about 11.6 days :-)
Since someone didn't take High School Civics (look up the video), I'll remind people that it was the Supreme Court that did this, specifically the far-right Trump-appointed justices. The President doesn't get to decide what Supreme Court decisions he wants or doesn't want. It's now up to Congress to at least try to do something, but it will be almost impossible.
Reactive Regulation
But reactive regulation, written in the wake of public outrage, is rarely good.I've always thought that laws named after a specific person were pretty much always bad laws. They tend to be knee-jerk reactions to one-off newsworthy events and not reasonable compromises to important problems.NCMEC "statistics"
Not long after the NCMEC was founded, I remember them running ads/PSAs about how many children were abducted. The numbers were pretty scary, lots of kids. I'm a math geek so I ran the numbers. If their numbers were right, it meant that by age 18 almost half of all kids had been abducted. It turns out they counted not true abductions, but custodial disputes including being some very small amount of time late for dropping off a child with the other parent. Actual abductions are horrific, but accounted for a small fraction of their so-called "statistics" at the time. I guess trying to justify their existence?
One more state that "mostly" doesn't use Sheriffs
In addition to Alaska and Connecticut, New Hampshire doesn't really have Sheriffs doing law enforcement. Although they are sworn officers, the role of Sheriff here is basically courtroom security and prisoner transportation. I think they can also do traffic stops? Of course, any position at all can be susceptible to petty abuses, but there's not that much room here for anything major.
About junk snail mail
The main difference is that snail mail costs $$. $ to print the mail and $ to send it even at bulk rate. Phone calls and email are effectively free, so there is a lot more of those most of the time. Of course, given that it's election season here, my mailbox is crammed with candidate flyers (pretty much all of them for/against one specific candidate.
Try another report type
Have you tried reporting it as "Sensitive media"? Maybe they just swapped the two categories. Maybe we should try all the categories to find out which is now which...
What people want versus how much they care about it
One of the things these vague "perception" polls almost never do is collect partner data on how important the issue is to the subject. 60% of people might be in favor of or against something, but 90% of those people don't really care that much about it or think it's an important issue. And of course, there's still the big difference between "thinking something is bad" and "making that something illegal".
I hate being this guy....
I completely agree that cops WAY too often use these pretextual excuses to finagle their way into full searches of absurdly questionable legality. I hate that they get away with doing this, time after time. But.... Even if marijuana is legal, driving under the influence of marijuana is not. There's at least some similarity to spotting what looks like an open container of alcohol. That should give them the right to conduct a field sobriety test and look for actual evidence of open marijuana in (reasonable places in) the car. I really can't believe I'm saying this out loud. Especially not as an Anonymous Coward :-)
Not the first time AI has tried to trick us into helping it
As always, there's an XKCD cartoon right on point: Robot Uprising
Hoping against hope
I have to say that, as a Twitter user, I really hope Musk doesn't buy Twitter. I can't imagine how much and how fast it will go downhill if he does.
Substitute us for them
Sadly, there's basically not one fact in this article that wouldn't be completely believable about the United States. We fabricate or plant physical evidence and hide exculpatory stuff all the time, that's just another day at work for many LEOs. It's not remotely a leap to consider actively planting digital evidence, which can be even harder to refute. And given that the device is in the hands of the police, it would be easy for them to make sure no traces of the tampering remained before defense could get the device examined by an outside forensics expert.
"But the more important question right now is why would Congress be looking to give the Copyright Office more autonomy when it's quite clear that the Office has absolutely no competency when it comes to modernizing its system, and there has been a six-year pattern of throwing away money without a properly managed plan and a longstanding practice of lying about it to Congress itself?"
Sounds like Congress figured out they are perfectly suited to overseeing themselves, saving Congress the trouble of lacking all competency and then lying about it....
Maybe I'm just confused
but why would an archival storage system for something that can by definition be considered evidence in legal cases allow people to log in and erase or alter that evidence?
Even with an audit trail (which is implied), this just seems like madness. Every frame of footage uploaded should be 100% protected. During any trial that happens, the two sides are of course allowed to pick and choose exactly the frames they want to present to support their case.....
Maybe this could end up being a good thing
Maybe, just maybe....
If a worm were spread that permanently bricked every Philips smart light bulb it connected to, the public backlash against Philips would start some "serious" thinking about this stuff. The cost to the "innocent externals" would be a few bucks for a busted lightbulb, the cost to Philips would be a warning shot across their bow.
just maybe.....
Stupid question
I see nothing at all on NameCheap's page about how to sign the petition. I see a place to sign up for their mailing list, and a place to share the page. But nothing about signing the petition.
Doing the math
150GB at 100% of 1.5Mbps =
That's assuming anyone actually gets 100% of the "1.5Mbps". It seems to me that the lousy speed is the real data cap here.
https://youtu.be/MWbQwSURR98?t=102